'Democracy is more than polls'

[dragonfly94]

when will he come out with all Thais are equal, but some are more equal than others?

[lostoday]

I moved to Thailand with my parents in 2005. I have lived here or at least been based here for 3380 days. In the 3380 days I have lived here I have witnessed "true democracy" in action for 3 days. They were on the 6th of February, 2005, the 23rd of December, 2007 and the 3rd of July, 2011. I was glad to see the process followed and was happy the party that the majority wanted to win actually win it. Sadly for 3377 days I have seen the opposite of democracy.

When people understand that elections allow the winning party to practice democracy after the ballot box instead of elections giving them carte blanche to abuse the democratic process until the next election then democracy will continue to only be witnessed 1 day every 4 years or so.

Elections are but one tiny important part of a multi faceted complex set of "pillars" if you will that is called democracy. Look above at the comments where some still only harp on about elections as if it is the only principle there is. Ironically those same people will denounce and ignore election results if the party they have invested time in defending on this forum do not win. We have seen it before with the 2007 referendum results. All polls that have not gone the PTP way pre and post coup. They have the mindset of democracy when it suits their agenda and conspiracy when it doesn't.

Some are perplexed that Prayut is preaching democracy when he came into power off the back of a coup. The UDD supporters criticize Prayut's government by highlighting all the principles of democracy that they do not adhere too. Ironically the very same principles the UDD ignore when referring to the shin governments because the UDD supporters only harp on about elections as that is the only one the PTP / UDD adhere too. Well Prayut has never ever said he is democratic, who has never hidden behind a facade of democracy, has never called his government a democratically elected one, but has witnessed this democratic process poke it's head through the fabric of corruption, political killings and undemocratic rule more than the 3 times I did and recognized it was a self perpetuating process that never moved Thailand forward constructively and only crippled it.

The PTP never recognized any fault with democracy because they were the ones abusing it for personal gain. They didn't want the system to change. They wanted the keep the farmers poor and that carrot just out of reach to continue to win elections. That is not moving a country forward. It is making a few select people incredibly rich.

Prauyt recognized democracy had failed and is doing something about it and for that fact alone it makes him more democratic than the PTP who were run by an unelected criminal leader would ever dream of.

You wrote, "Elections are but one tiny important part of a multi faceted complex set of "pillars" if you will that is called democracy."

Any 12 year old in the West could tell you the accurate answer and that you are completely wrong. Democracy is a government by elected representatives. It is not a tiny part it is the whole thing. Can't have a democracy without elections.

You may not like the results of the election or the election may not be what you would like but a democratic government is government by elected representatives - that's it.

As for the rest of your post it is contradicted by reading the OP - which I suggest you do.

​The subject of this thread is not another re hash of the elected governments of Thailand which you didn't like.

The subject is the new definition of democracy.

[Mango Bob]

True Democracy to this PM is Article 44. It's easy to run a government when you make all the decisions and no one can argue against them.

[ExPratt]

Elections are but one tiny important part of a multi faceted complex set of "pillars" if you will that is called democracy. Look above at the comments where some still only harp on about elections

Tell me more of these "faceted complex Pillars" of democracy that do not require an election to fulfill the Democratic ideal ?

You came here with your Mum and Dad , you still living with them ?

[tonbridgebrit]

I've noticed that a number of ThaiVisa people love to go on about democracy, and how they reckon that Thaksin did not get a majority or a mandate.

Okay, lets look at the general election held in Britain a week ago. About 67% of the elctorate actually voted. Of those who did vote, almost 37% voted for the Conservatives, 30.4% voted for Labour.
This gave the Conservatives a slim majority in parliament.
I might or might not love the Conservatives, but I accept democracy in Britain. And if you lose the election, well, you try to win the next one. You don't do things like get on the streets and try to have the result removed !!

[KarenBravo]

I think Abraham Lincoln put it rather well in the Gettysburg address.

"A government of the people, by the people, for the people".

The last two are presently missing and previously the last was always missing.

[ExPratt]

Whats it called when all 4 are missing ?

Representation ,is an Election , Freedom , is freedom of speech, expression, protest and opposition, Justice One day there may be, , Equality , yes the equality that comes to democracy from 1 man 1 vote regardless of who you support and how much money you have

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed.

[lostoday]

I think Abraham Lincoln put it rather well in the Gettysburg address.

"A government of the people, by the people, for the people".

The last two are presently missing and previously the last was always missing.

Lincoln's definition of democracy, “As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy. Whatever differs from this, to the extent of the difference, is no democracy.”

There was much debate about this and Lincoln won the election because he had the most votes. The people who disagreed with him called it the tyranny of the majority. The big city interests supported Lincoln and the farmers in the South did not. Big city on one hand and rural farmers on the other. Well you know what happened. Civil war and those city fellers killed all the Southern farmers and that was that.

Some say that Lincoln bought the votes, "I leave it to you to determine how it shall be done; but remember that I am President of the United States clothed with great power, and I expect you to procure those votes."

Maybe he said the above and maybe he didn't. I'm not really sure.

Edited May 17, 2015 by lostoday

[gabruce]

Corruption kills the first 2 ideals - Justice and Equality.

From the comments above, the blind sees better than the biased.

Thailand has never had true democracy. It is all about power struggle. The reason for acquiring power is money, gathered through the state of corruption.

By measuring the depth of corruption of each government or coup, we can correlate the degree of divergence from true democracy.

Thailand has had a true democracy many times but not for long. Synonym for Democracy is elected government as opposed to appointed government.

I like this quote from Wikipedia:

According to American political scientist Larry Diamond, it consists of four key elements: "1. A political system for choosing and replacing the government through free and fair elections. 2. The active participation of the people, as citizens, in politics and civic life. 3. Protection of the human rights of all citizens. 4. A rule of law, in which the laws and procedures apply equally to all citizens".^[3]

[gabruce]

I moved to Thailand with my parents in 2005. I have lived here or at least been based here for 3380 days. In the 3380 days I have lived here I have witnessed "true democracy" in action for 3 days. They were on the 6th of February, 2005, the 23rd of December, 2007 and the 3rd of July, 2011. I was glad to see the process followed and was happy the party that the majority wanted to win actually win it. Sadly for 3377 days I have seen the opposite of democracy.

When people understand that elections allow the winning party to practice democracy after the ballot box instead of elections giving them carte blanche to abuse the democratic process until the next election then democracy will continue to only be witnessed 1 day every 4 years or so.

Elections are but one tiny important part of a multi faceted complex set of "pillars" if you will that is called democracy. Look above at the comments where some still only harp on about elections as if it is the only principle there is. Ironically those same people will denounce and ignore election results if the party they have invested time in defending on this forum do not win. We have seen it before with the 2007 referendum results. All polls that have not gone the PTP way pre and post coup. They have the mindset of democracy when it suits their agenda and conspiracy when it doesn't.

Some are perplexed that Prayut is preaching democracy when he came into power off the back of a coup. The UDD supporters criticize Prayut's government by highlighting all the principles of democracy that they do not adhere too. Ironically the very same principles the UDD ignore when referring to the shin governments because the UDD supporters only harp on about elections as that is the only one the PTP / UDD adhere too. Well Prayut has never ever said he is democratic, who has never hidden behind a facade of democracy, has never called his government a democratically elected one, but has witnessed this democratic process poke it's head through the fabric of corruption, political killings and undemocratic rule more than the 3 times I did and recognized it was a self perpetuating process that never moved Thailand forward constructively and only crippled it.

The PTP never recognized any fault with democracy because they were the ones abusing it for personal gain. They didn't want the system to change. They wanted the keep the farmers poor and that carrot just out of reach to continue to win elections. That is not moving a country forward. It is making a few select people incredibly rich.

Prauyt recognized democracy had failed and is doing something about it and for that fact alone it makes him more democratic than the PTP who were run by an unelected criminal leader would ever dream of.

You wrote, "Elections are but one tiny important part of a multi faceted complex set of "pillars" if you will that is called democracy."

Any 12 year old in the West could tell you the accurate answer and that you are completely wrong. Democracy is a government by elected representatives. It is not a tiny part it is the whole thing. Can't have a democracy without elections.

You may not like the results of the election or the election may not be what you would like but a democratic government is government by elected representatives - that's it.

As for the rest of your post it is contradicted by reading the OP - which I suggest you do.

​The subject of this thread is not another re hash of the elected governments of Thailand which you didn't like.

The subject is the new definition of democracy.

Can't have "ice cream" without ice either. I wouldn' enjoy it as much without the cream and flavourings, in fact I wouldn't call it ice-cream at all.

An election is an election. That's all. It is part of what many Democracies are. Please note that I do NOT have a PHD in Political Science, so I am far from an expert.

[lostoday]

Corruption kills the first 2 ideals - Justice and Equality.

From the comments above, the blind sees better than the biased.

Thailand has never had true democracy. It is all about power struggle. The reason for acquiring power is money, gathered through the state of corruption.

By measuring the depth of corruption of each government or coup, we can correlate the degree of divergence from true democracy.

Thailand has had a true democracy many times but not for long. Synonym for Democracy is elected government as opposed to appointed government.

I like this quote from Wikipedia:

According to American political scientist Larry Diamond, it consists of four key elements: "1. A political system for choosing and replacing the government through free and fair elections. 2. The active participation of the people, as citizens, in politics and civic life. 3. Protection of the human rights of all citizens. 4. A rule of law, in which the laws and procedures apply equally to all citizens".^[3]

Cool, ya but you stopped reading. A bit further down in the same article.

Karl Popper defined democracy in contrast to dictatorship or tyranny, thus focusing on opportunities for the people to control their leaders and to oust them without the need for a revolution.

Several variants of democracy exist, but there are two basic forms, both of which concern how the whole body of all eligible citizens executes its will. One form of democracy is direct democracy, in which all eligible citizens have direct and active participation in the political decision making. In most modern democracies, the whole body of eligible citizens remain the sovereign power but political power is exercised indirectly through elected representatives; this is called a representative democracy.

To sum it up. Can't have a democracy without the control of leaders by people and not the reverse. Hope this helps in your study.

[elgordo38]

"True democracy, he said, was actually based on four principles: justice, equality, freedom and representation."

Education would be good too and a strong tradition.

I was so moved I wept.

[jesimps]

Just like the voice of God isn't it? Would be nice to see "In my opinion" preceeding these expressions.

[khounteen]

This expert knows so much about democracy.

He should know that democracy is a contest between differring opinions and the winner is the party with the most support for its opinions and policies.

He should know that throwing out an elected government is treason and it is an offence punishable with the death penalty in some countries.

Or his democracy conveniently forgot about it?

[tbthailand]

Corruption kills the first 2 ideals - Justice and Equality.

From the comments above, the blind sees better than the biased.

Thailand has never had true democracy. It is all about power struggle. The reason for acquiring power is money, gathered through the state of corruption.

By measuring the depth of corruption of each government or coup, we can correlate the degree of divergence from true democracy.

Thailand has had a true democracy many times but not for long. Synonym for Democracy is elected government as opposed to appointed government.

Democracy was the name, corruption was the game.

corruption and democracy are not mutually exclusive

corruption doesn't care what kind of government is in place, but corruption is harder in an open and free society than it is in a not-open, not-free society.

and yes, Thailand has had true democracy - but the military has always been around to kill it.... time and time again. It's like a bad horror flick.

[tbthailand]

A military coup that throws out an elected government lectures the masses about "true democracy." He forgot his fifth principle of disenfranchisement. A pentagon of Thainess democracy.

"elected government"

again that rubbish "elected government"

forgetting how, why and by whom and with what understanding they were elected

forgetting the corrupt and incapable way they governed

elected, yes, they were:

http://www.voanews.com/content/asian-observer-group-commends-thai-election-cites-minor-flaws--125003034/141777.html

The caretaker PM, Abhisit, conceded victory ...

“It is clear that Pheu Thai will win the election,” Abhisit told supporters at party headquarters in Bangkok. “I congratulate Yingluck on becoming the next prime minister.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-07-03/pro-thaksin-party-to-win-parliamentary-majority-thailand-exit-poll-shows

oops.

(on a related note, this article quotes our dear 'democratic soldier' with a tint of foreshadowing ...

Army Chief Prayuth Chan-ocha urged Thailand’s 47.3 million voters last month not to pick the “same thing” in elections, the last four of which have been won by Thaksin loyalists.

couldn't see the "intervention" coming??)

Edited May 17, 2015 by tbthailand

[jesimps]

Doesn't the country have a PM who described himself as a democratic soldier but sees democracy as a trap ?

Is what he is saying worse that Thaksin saying, "Democracy is not my goal"?

Thaksin wanted to be like his buddy, the thug, Hun Sen, and did everything possible to become 'President for Life' of Thailand.

General Prayut is doing everything possible to bury the influence of Thaksin and to set up conditions in Thailand where democracy, if not thrive, at least can grow. That is my opinion.

That all very well, but despite what Thaksin did or said, he was democratically elected by the people, and if the people disagreed with what he did/said they could democratically unelect him. Can't you people see that that is the difference between a democracy and what Thailand has now? In a democracy the voters realise that who they vote in could turn out bad, but having the ability to vote them out next time around leaves the power in the peoples' hands, which is as it should be. Every citizen deserves to have his (or her) say.

Edited May 17, 2015 by jesimps

[ThaiUser]

Apart from one example in history (West Germany under the supervision of 3 occupying nations) democracies have never succeeded when introduced from the top. They usually start from the bottom to build themselves up via the people and their vote and so provided a solid and large foundation to it.

Democracies introduced from the top always will favour the so called elite or educated class that seems to know how democracy should function. They might have the best intention, but by excluding the majority of people from the process that defines how the laws or constitution operate they create and under which all have to live, they make sure that the process of creating this kind of democracy isn’t democratic.

I agree with Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha that justice, equality, freedom and representation are the cornerstones of a functioning democracy; but it requires a solid foundation on which these cornerstones are placed and support the building that will be erected. In my view we have too many appointed experts of the elite taking part how our future democracy should look like and the voice of the majority not really is being heard. I wouldn’t mind if the circle of people that define how laws and constitution in the future are functioning is extended to all people and if that process takes two or three years more I don’t mind either. Yes, let the expert write the new laws and constitution but based on the input of all people. It will ensure that when placed to the vote in front of the people they later can’t bring arguments forward like that they voted for it because they didn’t have a say in it or a choice. I will also ensure that any demonstrations in a future Thailand can’t turn into the events we have seen sadly so often in the past. Anybody not excepting the outcome of an elections and using violence is only showing what he/she things about democracy because they violate laws they have stipulated and voted on.

[trogers]

Corruption kills the first 2 ideals - Justice and Equality.

From the comments above, the blind sees better than the biased.

Thailand has never had true democracy. It is all about power struggle. The reason for acquiring power is money, gathered through the state of corruption.

By measuring the depth of corruption of each government or coup, we can correlate the degree of divergence from true democracy.

Thailand has had a true democracy many times but not for long. Synonym for Democracy is elected government as opposed to appointed government.

Democracy was the name, corruption was the game.

corruption and democracy are not mutually exclusive

corruption doesn't care what kind of government is in place, but corruption is harder in an open and free society than it is in a not-open, not-free society.

and yes, Thailand has had true democracy - but the military has always been around to kill it.... time and time again. It's like a bad horror flick.

What is an open and free society? When did Thailand ever had that?

[lostoday]

What is an open and free society? When did Thailand ever had that?

Your posting was difficult to figure out but I think you wrote the line above.

What does an open and free society have to do with the topic of this thread?

What does open and free society have to do with democracy?

Democracy is just the peoples choice as opposed to one or few choosing.

All of the people can choose to not have an open and free society if they want.

Happens all the time. I moved to Thailand because it is/was more open and free than the USA. The USA is a democracy but it's not open and free for me because I'm older than the age that the USA considers valuable.

I can go to the grocery store and smile at people and get a genuine smile back; in the USA I'd get arrested.

[EnglishJohn]

I've noticed that a number of ThaiVisa people love to go on about democracy, and how they reckon that Thaksin did not get a majority or a mandate.

Okay, lets look at the general election held in Britain a week ago. About 67% of the elctorate actually voted. Of those who did vote, almost 37% voted for the Conservatives, 30.4% voted for Labour.

This gave the Conservatives a slim majority in parliament.

I might or might not love the Conservatives, but I accept democracy in Britain. And if you lose the election, well, you try to win the next one. You don't do things like get on the streets and try to have the result removed !!

You think the situation in the UK and Thailand is comparable ? - hilarious. Most Pheu-Thai MP's would be in prison, not Parliament.

Maybe you missed it, but nobody went on the streets after Pheu-Thai got elected. It happened after the amnesty disgrace. The most disgusting political act I have ever witnessed.

I tell you what, why don't you just lie and make up facts to suit yourself ?. Oh, you did.

If you support Pheu-Thai, you have no idea what democracy really is. As deputy PM Chalerm said himself : "We don't need to worry about minorities. If they don't like it, they can vote us out next time".

[Baerboxer]

Democracy is more than polls. True, but they are the fundamental building blocks of democracy. And when you are complicit in preventing them, and overthrow the government which resulted from a poll, and was offering itself up to another poll, then you are turning your back on democracy and walking away from it, no matter that you claim to be a "democratic soldier"!

Look up the definition of democracy.

Then read what needs to be in place to facilitate democracy and how a government that breaks the law should be dealt with.

Democracy is a form of government. A country that adopts democracy needs other things in place to.

Allowing a non elected criminal fugitive to effectively take over a government, dictate policies, appoint ministers etc is walking well away from democracy and the principles of justice and law. Or do you still like to believe PTP were democratic, Yingluck was really in charge and made all the decisions, and they never ever did anything wrong or dishonest?

[lucky11]

Corruption kills the first 2 ideals - Justice and Equality.

From the comments above, the blind sees better than the biased.

Thailand has never had true democracy. It is all about power struggle. The reason for acquiring power is money, gathered through the state of corruption.

By measuring the depth of corruption of each government or coup, we can correlate the degree of divergence from true democracy.

This is why this government is a breath of fresh air!!

[kennw]

Read the spoken words ! the PM is correct they are all an essential part of the demecratic menue and only few other PM's have aspired to these values, eg Khun Anon Parachon and a few others. But where are the new people that Thailand needs to lead it after an election is held? Sadly no head appears above the mediocry (and worse).

[ThaiUser]

I've noticed that a number of ThaiVisa people love to go on about democracy, and how they reckon that Thaksin did not get a majority or a mandate.

Okay, lets look at the general election held in Britain a week ago. About 67% of the elctorate actually voted. Of those who did vote, almost 37% voted for the Conservatives, 30.4% voted for Labour.

This gave the Conservatives a slim majority in parliament.

I might or might not love the Conservatives, but I accept democracy in Britain. And if you lose the election, well, you try to win the next one. You don't do things like get on the streets and try to have the result removed !!

You think the situation in the UK and Thailand is comparable ? - hilarious. Most Pheu-Thai MP's would be in prison, not Parliament.

Maybe you missed it, but nobody went on the streets after Pheu-Thai got elected. It happened after the amnesty disgrace. The most disgusting political act I have ever witnessed.

I tell you what, why don't you just lie and make up facts to suit yourself ?. Oh, you did.

If you support Pheu-Thai, you have no idea what democracy really is. As deputy PM Chalerm said himself : "We don't need to worry about minorities. If they don't like it, they can vote us out next time".

You think the situation in the UK and Thailand is comparable ? - hilarious. Most Pheu-Thai MP's would be in prison, not Parliament.

I don’t think that would be the case. Following the news in the UK, the cash for questions scandal, the child abuse cases that include members of parliament and was going on for two decades, MP’s offering their services to foreign companies using their political influence it seems that our MP’s would have less to worry about if they would represent a constituency there.

[TomJoad]

"True democracy, he said, was actually based on four principles: justice, equality, freedom and representation."

Education would be good too and a strong tradition.

I don't see the connection between democracy and education beyond a knowledge of the definition. China and Russia both have good education systems but no democracy.

How about Tiananmen Square...? Who started protesting...? *

______

* Hint: It wasn't Chinese peasants

[Srikcir]

Doesn't the country have a PM who described himself as a democratic soldier but sees democracy as a trap ?

Is what he is saying worse that Thaksin saying, "Democracy is not my goal"?

Thaksin wanted to be like his buddy, the thug, Hun Sen, and did everything possible to become 'President for Life' of Thailand.

General Prayut is doing everything possible to bury the influence of Thaksin and to set up conditions in Thailand where democracy, if not thrive, at least can grow. That is my opinion.

That would be an aristcratic democracy which is NOT the same as a pluralistic democracy. So long as the Thai aristocrats can abrogate the people's constitutional rights and liberties at will, democracy will forever remain stunted in Thailand.

[smedly]

this thread apart from the OP is mixture of -

1. Trolls

2. Those that have an interest apart from their own

3. Absolute stupidity

4. Those that have a genuine interest in Thailand - the future and it's people.

5. Those that are smart enough to see the filthy people here that have extorted and abused and want it to end

6. Those that support violence as a means to an end - some one is paying them

7. Those that support corruption and have of late seen their income shrink

In any civilised country there must be a structure of rules and laws that apply to everyone - no exceptions

Governments/individuals cannot be allowed to abuse their office - rules and laws must be in place and agencies to enforce them.

This country was at the brink last year, demonstrations went on for 6 months people were murdered on the streets including children because of the way a certain criminal was manipulating and abusing to feed his own agenda and ego, well the people said no, they said the cheating and abuse must stop, someone eventually stepped in and got them all round the table

The abuse has stopped - criminals are being rounded up - assets are being seized and returned to the people of Thailand

Well some will say that shutting certain people up is a violation of their civil liberties, on the other hand there are some people that deserve to be silenced, churning out hatred and opposition to anything that will cut off the money stream in to their greedy pockets, every country in the west now monitors and regulates what people can and cannot say and as time goes on the constrains are increasing - hate will no longer be tolerated - those that propagate violence, insight hatred and abuse free speech will be routed out and silenced, remember Egypt just sentenced an elected ex (so called) democratic premier to death, Thailand will make it eventually without the need for civil wars or anything else, all they need is a good set of rules to enforce good governance and the rest will be ...................... a better history

[baboon]

^^

I do believe in spooks. I do I do I do believe in spooks...